Posted by Elyse on August 11, 2000 at 13:26:23:

In Reply to: Re: Antiques posted by Dutch on August 10, 2000 at 19:20:03:

The archeologists I've been acquainted with weren't displaying priceless personal treasures or getting rich from selling such things. And I don't remember hearing complaints about that happening. I think most are just nuts-and-bolts nerds -- er, scholars, sincerely interested in adding to the knowledge in their field. And the work is hard, physical labor, outside in the elements. No point in giving them a black eye because of the jerks inevitable in any field. They're not Indiana Joneses (though they may enjoy the movies -- like astronomers and planetary scientists enjoy Star Wars). I feel confident Louis trusted the situation, too, or he wouldn't have felt compelled to include this didactic passage in the book. We have an opportunity here to deal with the greater reality of good scholars than illogically focusing on the bad examples. I don't mind a little perspective, of course, but I do mind letting things get out of perspective. Then people start to rationalize everyone behaving like the jerks. The artifact itself is only a part of what they're after anyway -- its placement is often much more important, especially with pre-Columbian sites. Dating is more of an issue there, since less is known about their cultures; the artifacts are pretty common, but the date the people were using or making them and how they were using them adds a lot to the body of knowledge in this subfield.

Follow Ups:

Re: Re: Antiques